The Wire Staff 
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has refused to pass orders in connection with a plea that challenged Tamil Nadu minister V. Senthil Balaji’s continuance in the state cabinet despite him being in jail and stripped of a portfolio.
In doing so, the division Bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan upheld the Madras high court verdict which had rejected a plea seeking the removal of Balaji from chief minister M.K. Stalin’s Cabinet.
“We have perused the impugned judgment of the high court and concur with the view taken. No interference is called for under Article 136,” the Bench said dismissing the plea, according to Bar and Bench.
Article 136 deals with the special leave to appeal by the Supreme Court. It means that the Supreme Court is authorised to grant in its discretion special leave to appeal from any judgement in any matter passed by any court or tribunal in the territory of India (except military tribunal and court-martial).
The apex court also orally contended that a governor needs the recommendation of the chief minister to dismiss a minister and cannot act independently on the issue.
Balaji was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) last year in a money laundering case. He was accused of being involved in a cash-for-jobs scam during his tenure as transport minister in the previous All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam-led Tamil Nadu government between 2011 and 2015. He later joined the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and became a minister in 2021.
Following his arrest in June 2023, Stalin withdrew all portfolios from Balaji but still retained him as a minister. An advocate R.L. Ravi moved the Madras high court, opposing Balaji’s continuance in the cabinet.
According to the Indian Express, the high court had said “ministers without portfolios do not have any specific ministries nor they do have carved out responsibilities. The chief minister is an executive head. It is the responsibility of an executive head to assign ministerial responsibilities to an elected representative. However, if he feels that a particular elected representative cannot be assigned the responsibility of a minister, there cannot be a moral or constitutional basis to retain such a member of the Legislative Assembly as a minister without a portfolio, which would be opposed to the ethos, good governance, and constitutional morality or integrity”.